Post by Bert CoulesThe text, as far as I recall, gives no clue. It's been directed both waysover the years.

For me the text gives some hints (the Glance) but the music provides the rest

Yes, and the fact that she didn't dot him with poor old Morold's sword. That is definitely the beginning of the attraction, which leaves them both incresingly conflicted. Which is why Tristan has been avoiding her throughout the voyage, and she knows it; and why he's so willing to join in a suicide pact, as the only way out of an unbearable situation. So indeed, the potion only liberates and makes absolute -- unnaturally absolute, perhaps -- what's there already. That is very much how love potions were seen in the middle ages.

But meyer's remark made me think of a relative's husband (soon ex-) who had a bright mind but a severe drink problem. A psychologist said that it wasn't the drink itself that had made him unpleasant and even violent, it just gave him the excuse to behave the way he really wanted to. Wagner's lovers are actually doing something similar, by overriding all other considerations, society, practicality, morality, the law, other people's feelings, the whole world really -- all in the name of one overwhelming, absolute inner desire. The world can't normally tolerate such things; darkness, night and death are their only refuge.

Post by Bert CoulesThe text, as far as I recall, gives no clue. It's been directed both waysover the years.

For me the text gives some hints (the Glance) but the music provides the rest

Yes, and the fact that she didn't dot him with poor old Morold's sword. Thatis definitely the beginning of the attraction, which leaves them bothincresingly conflicted. Which is why Tristan has been avoiding her throughoutthe voyage, and she knows it; and why he's so willing to join in a suicidepact, as the only way out of an unbearable situation. So indeed, the potiononly liberates and makes absolute -- unnaturally absolute, perhaps -- what'sthere already. That is very much how love potions were seen in the middleages.But meyer's remark made me think of a relative's husband (soon ex-) who had abright mind but a severe drink problem. A psychologist said that it wasn't thedrink itself that had made him unpleasant and even violent, it just gave himthe excuse to behave the way he really wanted to. Wagner's lovers are actuallydoing something similar, by overriding all other considerations, society,practicality, morality, the law, other people's feelings, the whole worldreally -- all in the name of one overwhelming, absolute inner desire. Theworld can't normally tolerate such things; darkness, night and death are theironly refuge.Cheers,Mike

On second thought, I agree with Mike. It isn't ambiguous. There are clearsigns that love was there before the potion.

Post by Bert CoulesThe text, as far as I recall, gives no clue. It's been directed both waysover the years.

For me the text gives some hints (the Glance) but the music provides the rest

Yes, and the fact that she didn't dot him with poor old Morold's sword. Thatis definitely the beginning of the attraction, which leaves them bothincresingly conflicted. Which is why Tristan has been avoiding her throughoutthe voyage, and she knows it; and why he's so willing to join in a suicidepact, as the only way out of an unbearable situation. So indeed, the potiononly liberates and makes absolute -- unnaturally absolute, perhaps -- what'sthere already. That is very much how love potions were seen in the middleages.But meyer's remark made me think of a relative's husband (soon ex-) who had abright mind but a severe drink problem. A psychologist said that it wasn't thedrink itself that had made him unpleasant and even violent, it just gave himthe excuse to behave the way he really wanted to. Wagner's lovers are actuallydoing something similar, by overriding all other considerations, society,practicality, morality, the law, other people's feelings, the whole worldreally -- all in the name of one overwhelming, absolute inner desire. Theworld can't normally tolerate such things; darkness, night and death are theironly refuge.Cheers,Mike

On second thought, I agree with Mike. It isn't ambiguous. There are clearsigns that love was there before the potion.Dick Partridge

When Isolde sings "Er sah mir in die Augen" with Wagners incredibly moving and telling music in support I think its pretty clear at least at that moment they were overwhelmed by passion. Before they drink the potion the passion had been hidden in its aspect as hate - the only way in which it could be brought into line with society - with the day world. The drinking of the potion -love, death, it doesn't matter - is a perfect theatrical symbol for the moment of recognition and release for the two lovers/the drinking of the potion represents the point at which the passion is no longer sublimated, when the lovers recognize it for what It is and give themselves over to it.

Post by m***@gmail.comWhen Isolde sings "Er sah mir in die Augen" with Wagners incredibly moving and telling music in support I think its pretty clear at least at that moment they were overwhelmed by passion.

This is ultimately what convinced me. Isolde's feelings for Tristan are pretty clear from the music. For instance, the love-motif makes at least one appearance in her narration. And "Er sah mir in die Augen" is certainly suggestive of either great love or sympathy.

Post by m***@gmail.comWhen Isolde sings "Er sah mir in die Augen" with Wagners incredibly moving and telling music in support I think its pretty clear at least at that moment they were overwhelmed by passion. Before they drink the potion the passion had been hidden in its aspect as hate - the only way in which it could be brought into line with society - with the day world. The drinking of the potion -love, death, it doesn't matter - is a perfect theatrical symbol for the moment of recognition and release for the two lovers/the drinking of the potion represents the point at which the passion is no longer sublimated, when the lovers recognize it for what It is and give themselves over to it.

Yes, although I think there was recognition before that, at least at some level. Tristan's deliberately calm courtesy and polite excuses suggest he's as unwilling to confront it as he is its object. And what Isolde expresses as scorn and fury is not passion denied but passion thwarted, because he's just handing her over to Mark.

Ought to go deeper into this, but no time right now -- and I'm not really as knowledgeable on tristan as some. Also, I kept having this perverse memory of that Kirk Douglas film The Vikings, and the immortal line "Love and Hate are horns on the same goat!"

Post by m***@gmail.comWhen Isolde sings "Er sah mir in die Augen" with Wagners incredibly movingand telling music in support I think its pretty clear at least at that momentthey were overwhelmed by passion. Before they drink the potion the passionhad been hidden in its aspect as hate - the only way in which it could bebrought into line with society - with the day world. The drinking of thepotion -love, death, it doesn't matter - is a perfect theatrical symbol forthe moment of recognition and release for the two lovers/the drinking of thepotion represents the point at which the passion is no longer sublimated,when the lovers recognize it for what It is and give themselves over to it.

Yes, although I think there was recognition before that, at least at somelevel. Tristan's deliberately calm courtesy and polite excuses suggest he's asunwilling to confront it as he is its object. And what Isolde expresses asscorn and fury is not passion denied but passion thwarted, because he's justhanding her over to Mark.Ought to go deeper into this, but no time right now -- and I'm not really asknowledgeable on tristan as some. Also, I kept having this perverse memory ofthat Kirk Douglas film The Vikings, and the immortal line "Love and Hate arehorns on the same goat!"CheersMike

It's in there somewhere, though I'm certainly not going to plough through the whole film again to watch it -- des belles moments, mais...

But it goes into my collection of great cinematic lines. Like the one from the epic Sodom and Gomorrah, as Victor Mature gallops off in a chariot:

"Watch out for Sodomite patrols!"

Or Tony Curtis's, from The Black Shield of Falworth:

"Yonder lies da cassle of my fadduh!"

He took great exception to Brit audiences laughing at that, calling it an insult to the people of New York. It isn't, of course; it just created the same effect as would a Damon Runyon mobster played with a pure Oxford accent!

Cheers,

Mike

(Mind you, there was one such mobster with a heavy Welsh accent -- Ownie Madden, the wise-guy who owned the Cotton Club, among much else. Not our greatest export.)

It's in there somewhere, though I'm certainly not going to plough through thewhole film again to watch it -- des belles moments, mais...But it goes into my collection of great cinematic lines. Like the one from the"Watch out for Sodomite patrols!""Yonder lies da cassle of my fadduh!"He took great exception to Brit audiences laughing at that, calling it aninsult to the people of New York. It isn't, of course; it just created thesame effect as would a Damon Runyon mobster played with a pure Oxford accent!Cheers,Mike(Mind you, there was one such mobster with a heavy Welsh accent -- OwnieMadden, the wise-guy who owned the Cotton Club, among much else. Not ourgreatest export.)

Mike, Hadn't you better clarify that you have not personally watched allthese films, life being too short and their artistic quality too American,but you have read that they contain these lines?

Post by Richard PartridgeMike, Hadn't you better clarify that you have not personally watched allthese films, life being too short and their artistic quality too American,but you have read that they contain these lines?Dick Partridge

Well, much as I'm tempted, I actually have seen The Vikings, several times, and The Black Shield -- once. Sodom & Gomorrah, no; began to, in hope of that line, but life's too short. As to too American artistic quality, being married to an American and, when healthy, a frequent US visitor, I have to own up there too -- I'm thoroughly programmed, especially by Disney in my childhood, and even today duly salivate at the sound of the Fox fanfare. Hell, I've even sat through Magic Fire (to bring us back on topic).

For deviating from which I must apologise, but Tristan, much as I admire it, doesn't hit me as hard as the Ring or Meistersinger. In fact it seems to bring out something almost like frivolity, perish the thought.

Being slightly more serious, though, wouldn't this be the perfect theatre in which to perform Tristan?

Actually they've done several plays based on the legend -- the latest of which has the cast singing "Anyone who had a heart" -- and a number of operas, but Wagner never. It would have to be a reduced orchestration, such as Jonathan Dove produced for the Ring, but as Longborough and others have proved, this works very well.

Post by Richard PartridgeMike, Hadn't you better clarify that you have not personally watched allthese films, life being too short and their artistic quality too American,but you have read that they contain these lines?Dick Partridge

Well, much as I'm tempted, I actually have seen The Vikings, several times,and The Black Shield -- once. Sodom & Gomorrah, no; began to, in hope of thatline, but life's too short. As to too American artistic quality, being marriedto an American and, when healthy, a frequent US visitor, I have to own upthere too -- I'm thoroughly programmed, especially by Disney in my childhood,and even today duly salivate at the sound of the Fox fanfare. Hell, I've evensat through Magic Fire (to bring us back on topic).For deviating from which I must apologise, but Tristan, much as I admire it,doesn't hit me as hard as the Ring or Meistersinger. In fact it seems to bringout something almost like frivolity, perish the thought.Being slightly more serious, though, wouldn't this be the perfect theatre inwhich to perform Tristan?http://youtu.be/WSNFvzNyPEYActually they've done several plays based on the legend -- the latest of whichhas the cast singing "Anyone who had a heart" -- and a number of operas, butWagner never. It would have to be a reduced orchestration, such as JonathanDove produced for the Ring, but as Longborough and others have proved, thisworks very well.Cheers,Mike

I agree with you about Tristan. This is a matter of personal taste, ofcourse, and I'm sure mine is very much a minority opinion, especially amongWagner lovers, but most of Tristan leaves me cold. I like the first act alot. The second act, except for the love duet, and except for the partafter they are discovered where Tristan invites Isolde to go with him to hishome, is Dullsville. In the third act Tristan complains that his world islike a desert, and that's the way I feel about the music, except for theLiebestod.

I do think the love duet is sublime. I particularly like the two bit partsgiven to Brangaene. I don't know enough about music to describe thisproperly, but it's as if her voice is just another supporting musicalinstrument; it doesn't carry the melody, or the main tune, or whatever youcall it.

Post by Richard PartridgeOn 6/30/17 12:00 PM, Mike Scott Rohan, atI agree with you about Tristan. This is a matter of personal taste, ofcourse, and I'm sure mine is very much a minority opinion, especially amongWagner lovers, but most of Tristan leaves me cold. I like the first act alot. The second act, except for the love duet, and except for the partafter they are discovered where Tristan invites Isolde to go with him to hishome, is Dullsville. In the third act Tristan complains that his world islike a desert, and that's the way I feel about the music, except for theLiebestod.I do think the love duet is sublime. I particularly like the two bit partsgiven to Brangaene. I don't know enough about music to describe thisproperly, but it's as if her voice is just another supporting musicalinstrument; it doesn't carry the melody, or the main tune, or whatever youcall it.

I've grown to like Tristan more and more over the years, but I'm in the same boat as you and Mike. Meistersinger, Parsifal, and the Ring are much more appealing works to me.

For one thing, Tristan is monothematic. Like La Boheme, it's love all the way down. It doesn't have the variety of themes or depth of humanity of Wagner's other operas. Redemption, self-sacrifice, resignation, and compassion are all missing from it. Even Tannhauser and Lohengrin deal with a wider variety of themes.

Yet at the same time, I have a great deal of respect for Tristan musically. Out of all of Wagner's operas, it is the most revolutionary and perhaps the most remarkable. When you consider what Wagner's competition was writing at the time -- Un Ballo in Maschera, for example -- it's all the more mind-boggling, like if someone had invented the home computer in 1890 and started mass-producing it. By all rights, Tristan should have been written fifty or a hundred years later.

In that perspective, Tristan is a momentous work. As drama, it has its faults. But as music, it is an unparalleled marvel of artistic genius.

Post by Richard PartridgeOn 6/30/17 12:00 PM, Mike Scott Rohan, atI agree with you about Tristan. This is a matter of personal taste, ofcourse, and I'm sure mine is very much a minority opinion, especially amongWagner lovers, but most of Tristan leaves me cold. I like the first act alot. The second act, except for the love duet, and except for the partafter they are discovered where Tristan invites Isolde to go with him to hishome, is Dullsville. In the third act Tristan complains that his world islike a desert, and that's the way I feel about the music, except for theLiebestod.I do think the love duet is sublime. I particularly like the two bit partsgiven to Brangaene. I don't know enough about music to describe thisproperly, but it's as if her voice is just another supporting musicalinstrument; it doesn't carry the melody, or the main tune, or whatever youcall it.

I've grown to like Tristan more and more over the years, but I'm in the same boat as you and Mike. Meistersinger, Parsifal, and the Ring are much more appealing works to me.For one thing, Tristan is monothematic. Like La Boheme, it's love all the way down. It doesn't have the variety of themes or depth of humanity of Wagner's other operas. Redemption, self-sacrifice, resignation, and compassion are all missing from it. Even Tannhauser and Lohengrin deal with a wider variety of themes.Yet at the same time, I have a great deal of respect for Tristan musically. Out of all of Wagner's operas, it is the most revolutionary and perhaps the most remarkable. When you consider what Wagner's competition was writing at the time -- Un Ballo in Maschera, for example -- it's all the more mind-boggling, like if someone had invented the home computer in 1890 and started mass-producing it. By all rights, Tristan should have been written fifty or a hundred years later.In that perspective, Tristan is a momentous work. As drama, it has its faults. But as music, it is an unparalleled marvel of artistic genius.REP

All I can say is that under the right circumstances Tristan draws me in as no other opera and no other Wagner opera can do. And that as they say is that.

Post by m***@gmail.comAll I can say is that under the right circumstances Tristan draws me in as no other opera and no other Wagner opera can do. And that as they say is that.

Yes, and that needs no defending. It's his most purely musical, most internal and least conventionally dramatic music-drama, speaking most directly mind to mind, or more accurately emotion to emotion. As such, if you're in tune with that emotion, certain aspects of it, that very lack of drama and what to me seems an excess of philosophical verbiage, will not matter. That's an entirely valid response, and no doubt one Wagner himself would have accepted -- although he might have wanted us to give the philosophy equal weight. No, it's my own poor response, if anything, that needs defending, and it certainly isn't wholesale. I admire the music, I love listening to great stretches of Tristan -- even some extended ones, as in Act II -- but I rarely sit right through it. Only a couple of performances, live or recorded, have ever held me rapt; the Kleiber is one, and, unpopularly, the Karajan. I can't help remembering that Wagner originally intended it as a popular, accessible piece, a moneyearner, and wondering what it would have been like if he'd kept it that way. I speculate, too, if it might have been better as some kind of quasi-cantata, like Das Lied von der Erde, or even a pure synphony. But beyond all that, I am certainly still in awe of it.

Post by Richard PartridgeMike, Hadn't you better clarify that you have not personally watched allthese films, life being too short and their artistic quality too American,but you have read that they contain these lines?Dick Partridge

Well, much as I'm tempted, I actually have seen The Vikings, several times,and The Black Shield -- once. Sodom & Gomorrah, no; began to, in hope of thatline, but life's too short. As to too American artistic quality, being marriedto an American and, when healthy, a frequent US visitor, I have to own upthere too -- I'm thoroughly programmed, especially by Disney in my childhood,and even today duly salivate at the sound of the Fox fanfare. Hell, I've evensat through Magic Fire (to bring us back on topic).For deviating from which I must apologise, but Tristan, much as I admire it,doesn't hit me as hard as the Ring or Meistersinger. In fact it seems to bringout something almost like frivolity, perish the thought.Being slightly more serious, though, wouldn't this be the perfect theatre inwhich to perform Tristan?http://youtu.be/WSNFvzNyPEYActually they've done several plays based on the legend -- the latest of whichhas the cast singing "Anyone who had a heart" -- and a number of operas, butWagner never. It would have to be a reduced orchestration, such as JonathanDove produced for the Ring, but as Longborough and others have proved, thisworks very well.Cheers,Mike

This would be the place for me to confess that when I was younger I didenjoy Batman comics.

Before we leave the matter of the love potion, we should note that it servedas King Marke's excuse to forgive the lovers at the end. If there had beenno potion -- if they had simply loved each other ever since they met inIreland -- he might not have been so understanding. After all, it is atruth universally acknowledged that no mortal can withstand the force of anoperatic potion.

Post by Richard PartridgeBefore we leave the matter of the love potion, we should note that it servedas King Marke's excuse to forgive the lovers at the end. If there had beenno potion -- if they had simply loved each other ever since they met inIreland -- he might not have been so understanding. After all, it is atruth universally acknowledged that no mortal can withstand the force of anoperatic potion.

You beat me to it. The ending is problematical. If, in fact, Tristanand Isolde had fallen in love with each other prior to the drinking ofthe potion, then Marke has been duped into agreeing to renounce Isoldeso that she might marry Tristan.

On the other hand, if the only reason they fell in love with each otheris on account of the love potion, then Marke's response undercuts thedrama. No need for the secrecy surrounding their love, no need for somany to die at the end. Marke would have been okay with the situation.

Post by Richard PartridgeBefore we leave the matter of the love potion, we should note that it servedas King Marke's excuse to forgive the lovers at the end. If there had beenno potion -- if they had simply loved each other ever since they met inIreland -- he might not have been so understanding. After all, it is atruth universally acknowledged that no mortal can withstand the force of anoperatic potion.

You beat me to it. The ending is problematical. If, in fact, Tristanand Isolde had fallen in love with each other prior to the drinking ofthe potion, then Marke has been duped into agreeing to renounce Isoldeso that she might marry Tristan.On the other hand, if the only reason they fell in love with each otheris on account of the love potion, then Marke's response undercuts thedrama. No need for the secrecy surrounding their love, no need for somany to die at the end. Marke would have been okay with the situation.Peculiar.- Gary

In the end it doesn't matter if Marke forgives them or not - the passion they have for each other is so all encompassing that the actions of the others do not make much of a difference. By the end of the opera they are together in the Night - Marke's opinions are irrelevant.

Post by Richard PartridgeBefore we leave the matter of the love potion, we should note that it servedas King Marke's excuse to forgive the lovers at the end. If there had beenno potion -- if they had simply loved each other ever since they met inIreland -- he might not have been so understanding. After all, it is atruth universally acknowledged that no mortal can withstand the force of anoperatic potion.

You beat me to it. The ending is problematical. If, in fact, Tristanand Isolde had fallen in love with each other prior to the drinking ofthe potion, then Marke has been duped into agreeing to renounce Isoldeso that she might marry Tristan.On the other hand, if the only reason they fell in love with each otheris on account of the love potion, then Marke's response undercuts thedrama. No need for the secrecy surrounding their love, no need for somany to die at the end. Marke would have been okay with the situation.Peculiar.- Gary

In the end it doesn't matter if Marke forgives them or not - the passion they have for each other is so all encompassing that the actions of the others do not make much of a difference. By the end of the opera they are together in the Night - Marke's opinions are irrelevant.

But isn't the emphasis on "night" attributable to the fact that they areindulging in an illicit affair? Isolde, because she is in love with theman who killed Morold, and Tristan because he is in love with a womanwho is destined for his uncle?

If the two had met without these complications, had both beenunattached, would their passion still be described in terms of "night"and "darkness" or would it be sunlight and flowers?

Post by Richard PartridgeBefore we leave the matter of the love potion, we should note that it servedas King Marke's excuse to forgive the lovers at the end. If there had beenno potion -- if they had simply loved each other ever since they met inIreland -- he might not have been so understanding. After all, it is atruth universally acknowledged that no mortal can withstand the force of anoperatic potion.

You beat me to it. The ending is problematical. If, in fact, Tristanand Isolde had fallen in love with each other prior to the drinking ofthe potion, then Marke has been duped into agreeing to renounce Isoldeso that she might marry Tristan.On the other hand, if the only reason they fell in love with each otheris on account of the love potion, then Marke's response undercuts thedrama. No need for the secrecy surrounding their love, no need for somany to die at the end. Marke would have been okay with the situation.Peculiar.- Gary

In the end it doesn't matter if Marke forgives them or not - the passion they have for each other is so all encompassing that the actions of the others do not make much of a difference. By the end of the opera they are together in the Night - Marke's opinions are irrelevant.

But isn't the emphasis on "night" attributable to the fact that they areindulging in an illicit affair? Isolde, because she is in love with theman who killed Morold, and Tristan because he is in love with a womanwho is destined for his uncle?If the two had met without these complications, had both beenunattached, would their passion still be described in terms of "night"and "darkness" or would it be sunlight and flowers?- Gary

You are a bit close to the way I feel about this work - its not about love its about passion. The essence of this passion is that it cannot be consummated; it only exists under impossible circumstances. Lets say the lovers got together and settled down - the passion would of course then vanish - it can't exist without its forbidden and suppressed aspects. Even though it cannot be satisfied it is still irresistible as even Marke recognizes when he realizes its nature. It is thusly be definition destructive - an irresistible drive that can never achieve its goal can only result in death - which means it is its true goal. So the lovers pass over into death or oblivion or whatever you want to call it. The potion as I have described previously is the moment of release and recognition by the lovers of the true nature of there feelings

Post by GaryIf the two had met without these complications, had both beenunattached, would their passion still be described in terms of "night"and "darkness" or would it be sunlight and flowers?- Gary

While the legend uses night and darkness only as the traditional cover for an assignation, Wagner in his characteristic way is interpreting and synthesizing mythical elements to suit his own purpose. Night and darkness in the opera supply not cover, but revelation, a moment when all the conventional pretences the lovers are obliged to maintain by day can at last be thrown aside. And beyond that they explicitly stand for more than their physical reality -- in particular the "night-bound land" that lies outside life at both ends, before and after. It's curiously reminiscent of Bede's image of human existence, as a sparrow that flies out of the darkness into one window of a brightly-lit hall, and out of another again.

It suggests that their love -- which is indeed passion, but also yearning -- is an ideal unfulfillable under normal circumstances, that it has origins outside of life, before their birth and after their death, that only in that eternal "night" can it become the absolute it truly is.

Wagner will have been very well aware that "Tristan" is a corruption of the older form "Tristram", traditionally meaning "born in sadness" (that may have been post-hoc interpretation, but it was accepted in Wagner's time) -- suggesting that for him life is a deeply imperfect, unbearable state, which is why he positively courts leaving it.

Post by Richard PartridgeBefore we leave the matter of the love potion, we should note that it servedas King Marke's excuse to forgive the lovers at the end. If there had beenno potion -- if they had simply loved each other ever since they met inIreland -- he might not have been so understanding. After all, it is atruth universally acknowledged that no mortal can withstand the force of anoperatic potion.

You beat me to it. The ending is problematical. If, in fact, Tristanand Isolde had fallen in love with each other prior to the drinking ofthe potion, then Marke has been duped into agreeing to renounce Isoldeso that she might marry Tristan.On the other hand, if the only reason they fell in love with each otheris on account of the love potion, then Marke's response undercuts thedrama. No need for the secrecy surrounding their love, no need for somany to die at the end. Marke would have been okay with the situation.

I'm afraid I can't agree. Whether Tristan and Isolde had feelings for each other before drinking the potion is immaterial to Marke and his forgiveness. What matters is that they _acted_ on those feelings, something for which the potion can (and should) be blamed.

I think people are getting tripped up by the word "love." The way I see it, there are different sorts and unequal degrees of attraction. Yes, Tristan and Isolde had feelings for each other before drinking the potion. But even if one calls those feelings "love," I don't think anyone would seriously suggest that those feelings were just as strong before drinking the potion as they were after drinking it.

Post by Richard PartridgeBefore we leave the matter of the love potion, we should note that it servedas King Marke's excuse to forgive the lovers at the end. If there had beenno potion -- if they had simply loved each other ever since they met inIreland -- he might not have been so understanding. After all, it is atruth universally acknowledged that no mortal can withstand the force of anoperatic potion.

You beat me to it. The ending is problematical. If, in fact, Tristanand Isolde had fallen in love with each other prior to the drinking ofthe potion, then Marke has been duped into agreeing to renounce Isoldeso that she might marry Tristan.On the other hand, if the only reason they fell in love with each otheris on account of the love potion, then Marke's response undercuts thedrama. No need for the secrecy surrounding their love, no need for somany to die at the end. Marke would have been okay with the situation.Peculiar.- Gary

I agree with your analysis. Either way there is a problem with the plot. Alot of operatic plots, in my opinion -- including Wagner's -- don't stand upunder analysis very well.

Post by Richard PartridgeI agree with your analysis. Either way there is a problem with the plot. Alot of operatic plots, in my opinion -- including Wagner's -- don't stand upunder analysis very well.Dick Partridge

Yes; IMHO, Wagner's philosophic ideas and his plots are in several cases inferior to his music. This is true not only of him but of other composers as well, both classical and in other forms of music with words. Ironically, the text often is written first and inspires the music, which then soars to realms far beyond it. Music has its own truth which can only be experienced and not described adequately at all. Beethoven said that music is the highest form of philosophy. Perhaps this is partly why he wrote only one opera, along with his disappointment in its reception.

Post by Richard PartridgeMike, Hadn't you better clarify that you have not personally watched allthese films, life being too short and their artistic quality too American,but you have read that they contain these lines?Dick Partridge

Well, much as I'm tempted, I actually have seen The Vikings, several times,and The Black Shield -- once. Sodom & Gomorrah, no; began to, in hope of thatline, but life's too short. As to too American artistic quality, being marriedto an American and, when healthy, a frequent US visitor, I have to own upthere too -- I'm thoroughly programmed, especially by Disney in my childhood,and even today duly salivate at the sound of the Fox fanfare. Hell, I've evensat through Magic Fire (to bring us back on topic).For deviating from which I must apologise, but Tristan, much as I admire it,doesn't hit me as hard as the Ring or Meistersinger. In fact it seems to bringout something almost like frivolity, perish the thought.Being slightly more serious, though, wouldn't this be the perfect theatre inwhich to perform Tristan?http://youtu.be/WSNFvzNyPEYActually they've done several plays based on the legend -- the latest of whichhas the cast singing "Anyone who had a heart" -- and a number of operas, butWagner never. It would have to be a reduced orchestration, such as JonathanDove produced for the Ring, but as Longborough and others have proved, thisworks very well.Cheers,Mike

This would be the place for me to confess that when I was younger I didenjoy Batman comics.Before we leave the matter of the love potion, we should note that it servedas King Marke's excuse to forgive the lovers at the end. If there had beenno potion -- if they had simply loved each other ever since they met inIreland -- he might not have been so understanding. After all, it is atruth universally acknowledged that no mortal can withstand the force of anoperatic potion.Dick Partridge

I enjyed Batman comics, too, when they were imported -- although I preferred Green Lantern and Hawkman, among others, as well as some British ones you've never heard of. And the tedium of a teenage hitch at a Perthshire army camp was lightened only by a volume of Thor reprints. I've made my living as a science-fiction and fantasy writer, after all, which may not be as identical as The Big Bang Theory writers seem to think, but ain't that far removed either.

As to the potion, yes indeed. But it's worth remembering that Marke's forgiveness is wholly Wagner's invention, as indeed is his entire character. The legendary Mark was usually depicted as a vengeful son of a bitch, at least as events developed, but not without some excuse. By the standards of the knightly codes around the time of the early versions of the legend, Tristan's pre-potion love for Iseult would have been inherently dishonorable (hers doesn't count so much!). The potion and its liberating effect give them extenuation in the eyes of the audience, but still leave Mark publicly humiliated and bound to retrieve his wife. As he does, in later versions, at least for a while, by coming to terms with Tristan. These versions were influenced by ideas of "courtly love", in which the husband becomes at best a straw villain to be outwitted. Wagner significantly removed the element of dramatic conflict from the story, making Mark positively saintly and redirecting the nastier aspects into Melot -- in most versions it's Mark who wounds Tristan. Why Wagner did this is an interesting speculstion, but it certainly makes Tristan harder to stage.

I enjoyed Batman comics, too, when they were imported -- although I preferredGreen Lantern and Hawkman, among others, as well as some British ones you'venever heard of. And the tedium of a teenage hitch at a Perthshire army campwas lightened only by a volume of Thor reprints. I've made my living as ascience-fiction and fantasy writer, after all, which may not be as identicalas The Big Bang Theory writers seem to think, but ain't that far removedeither.As to the potion, yes indeed. But it's worth remembering that Marke'sforgiveness is wholly Wagner's invention, as indeed is his entire character.The legendary Mark was usually depicted as a vengeful son of a bitch, at leastas events developed, but not without some excuse. By the standards of theknightly codes around the time of the early versions of the legend, Tristan'spre-potion love for Iseult would have been inherently dishonorable (hersdoesn't count so much!). The potion and its liberating effect give themextenuation in the eyes of the audience, but still leave Mark publiclyhumiliated and bound to retrieve his wife. As he does, in later versions, atleast for a while, by coming to terms with Tristan. These versions wereinfluenced by ideas of "courtly love", in which the husband becomes at best astraw villain to be outwitted. Wagner significantly removed the element ofdramatic conflict from the story, making Mark positively saintly andredirecting the nastier aspects into Melot -- in most versions it's Mark whowounds Tristan. Why Wagner did this is an interesting speculstion, but itcertainly makes Tristan harder to stage.Cheers,Mike

I used to read a lot of science fiction. Science fiction gets a bad namebecause whenever an established author writes a book in that genre, it isn'tviewed as science fiction. It's viewed as literature. For example, "BraveNew World," by Huxley, fits any conceivable definition of science fiction.Another example would be Orwell's "1984."

I can't resist putting in a plug for my all-time favorite work of SF: "TheMote in God's Eye," by Niven and Pournelle. Have you read it?

Post by Richard PartridgeI can't resist putting in a plug for my all-time favorite work of SF: "TheMote in God's Eye," by Niven and Pournelle. Have you read it?Dick Partridge

I just finished the second Ringworld book and was considering going on to The Mote in God's Eye. Maybe I'll do that. The title reminds me of The Gods Themselves, which is a very entertaining read as well, albeit uneven (the middle section is amazing, while the last third is uninteresting to anyone who has read Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, which does a much better job dealing with the same themes).

I'm not sure I have a favorite science-fiction novel, but maybe A Canticle for Leibowitz.

Post by Richard PartridgeI can't resist putting in a plug for my all-time favorite work of SF: "TheMote in God's Eye," by Niven and Pournelle. Have you read it?Dick Partridge

I just finished the second Ringworld book and was considering going on to TheMote in God's Eye. Maybe I'll do that. The title reminds me of The GodsThemselves, which is a very entertaining read as well, albeit uneven (themiddle section is amazing, while the last third is uninteresting to anyone whohas read Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, which does a much better jobdealing with the same themes).I'm not sure I have a favorite science-fiction novel, but maybe A Canticle for Leibowitz.REP

I enjoyed "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" many years ago. I think that's theone where the moon sort of declares independence from earth. A 4th of Julytheme. And Heinlein told us more than once, "There is no free lunch!"

I enjoyed Batman comics, too, when they were imported -- although I preferredGreen Lantern and Hawkman, among others, as well as some British ones you'venever heard of. And the tedium of a teenage hitch at a Perthshire army campwas lightened only by a volume of Thor reprints. I've made my living as ascience-fiction and fantasy writer, after all, which may not be as identicalas The Big Bang Theory writers seem to think, but ain't that far removedeither.As to the potion, yes indeed. But it's worth remembering that Marke'sforgiveness is wholly Wagner's invention, as indeed is his entire character.The legendary Mark was usually depicted as a vengeful son of a bitch, at leastas events developed, but not without some excuse. By the standards of theknightly codes around the time of the early versions of the legend, Tristan'spre-potion love for Iseult would have been inherently dishonorable (hersdoesn't count so much!). The potion and its liberating effect give themextenuation in the eyes of the audience, but still leave Mark publiclyhumiliated and bound to retrieve his wife. As he does, in later versions, atleast for a while, by coming to terms with Tristan. These versions wereinfluenced by ideas of "courtly love", in which the husband becomes at best astraw villain to be outwitted. Wagner significantly removed the element ofdramatic conflict from the story, making Mark positively saintly andredirecting the nastier aspects into Melot -- in most versions it's Mark whowounds Tristan. Why Wagner did this is an interesting speculstion, but itcertainly makes Tristan harder to stage.Cheers,Mike

I used to read a lot of science fiction. Science fiction gets a bad namebecause whenever an established author writes a book in that genre, it isn'tviewed as science fiction. It's viewed as literature. For example, "BraveNew World," by Huxley, fits any conceivable definition of science fiction.Another example would be Orwell's "1984."I can't resist putting in a plug for my all-time favorite work of SF: "TheMote in God's Eye," by Niven and Pournelle. Have you read it?Dick Partridge

Yes, Kingley Amis and Robert Conquest both make exactly that point in their anthologies. My late colleague Iain Banks (whose The Wasp Factory was adapted for an opera and staged at the ROH) used to write self-conscious "literature" under that name and SF as Iain M. Banks, just to underline and mock the distinction (and, unforgiveably, was very succesful at both!).

Just as anything fantastic become "magical realism" if it's written by the "right kind" of author; Bulgakov's Master & Margarita was immediately hailed as a magical-realism classic by critics who didn't realise he'd written entirely recognisable SF as well. Fortunately the distinction seems to be blurring at last.

Yes, I've read Mote in God's Eye, often -- very likeable, and I much preferred it to its sequel. I've met Larry himself a couple of times, especially when we were on convention panels together, though I have to say I didn't take to him personally, much as I admire his stuff. I have friends in common with Jerry, but can't remember meeting him -- lots of stories about him, though, including his standing over the chef at a convention with a machete... My own US mentors included Poul Anderson, Jim Blish (both into opera, incidentally) and Roger Zelazny, all much missed.

I enjoyed Batman comics, too, when they were imported -- although I preferredGreen Lantern and Hawkman, among others, as well as some British ones you'venever heard of. And the tedium of a teenage hitch at a Perthshire army campwas lightened only by a volume of Thor reprints. I've made my living as ascience-fiction and fantasy writer, after all, which may not be as identicalas The Big Bang Theory writers seem to think, but ain't that far removedeither.As to the potion, yes indeed. But it's worth remembering that Marke'sforgiveness is wholly Wagner's invention, as indeed is his entire character.The legendary Mark was usually depicted as a vengeful son of a bitch, at leastas events developed, but not without some excuse. By the standards of theknightly codes around the time of the early versions of the legend, Tristan'spre-potion love for Iseult would have been inherently dishonorable (hersdoesn't count so much!). The potion and its liberating effect give themextenuation in the eyes of the audience, but still leave Mark publiclyhumiliated and bound to retrieve his wife. As he does, in later versions, atleast for a while, by coming to terms with Tristan. These versions wereinfluenced by ideas of "courtly love", in which the husband becomes at best astraw villain to be outwitted. Wagner significantly removed the element ofdramatic conflict from the story, making Mark positively saintly andredirecting the nastier aspects into Melot -- in most versions it's Mark whowounds Tristan. Why Wagner did this is an interesting speculstion, but itcertainly makes Tristan harder to stage.Cheers,Mike

I used to read a lot of science fiction. Science fiction gets a bad namebecause whenever an established author writes a book in that genre, it isn'tviewed as science fiction. It's viewed as literature. For example, "BraveNew World," by Huxley, fits any conceivable definition of science fiction.Another example would be Orwell's "1984."I can't resist putting in a plug for my all-time favorite work of SF: "TheMote in God's Eye," by Niven and Pournelle. Have you read it?Dick Partridge

Yes, Kingley Amis and Robert Conquest both make exactly that point in theiranthologies. My late colleague Iain Banks (whose The Wasp Factory was adaptedfor an opera and staged at the ROH) used to write self-conscious "literature"under that name and SF as Iain M. Banks, just to underline and mock thedistinction (and, unforgiveably, was very succesful at both!).Just as anything fantastic become "magical realism" if it's written by the"right kind" of author; Bulgakov's Master & Margarita was immediately hailedas a magical-realism classic by critics who didn't realise he'd writtenentirely recognisable SF as well. Fortunately the distinction seems to beblurring at last.Yes, I've read Mote in God's Eye, often -- very likeable, and I much preferredit to its sequel. I've met Larry himself a couple of times, especially when wewere on convention panels together, though I have to say I didn't take to himpersonally, much as I admire his stuff. I have friends in common with Jerry,but can't remember meeting him -- lots of stories about him, though, includinghis standing over the chef at a convention with a machete... My own US mentorsincluded Poul Anderson, Jim Blish (both into opera, incidentally) and RogerZelazny, all much missed.Cheers,Mike

I thought "The Mote in God's Eye" was truly inspired. I read severalsubsequent works by the same team and I thought they didn't come close.

Post by Bert CoulesThe text, as far as I recall, gives no clue. It's been directed both waysover the years.

For me the text gives some hints (the Glance) but the music provides the rest

Yes, and the fact that she didn't dot him with poor old Morold's sword. That is definitely the beginning of the attraction, which leaves them both incresingly conflicted. Which is why Tristan has been avoiding her throughout the voyage, and she knows it; and why he's so willing to join in a suicide pact, as the only way out of an unbearable situation. So indeed, the potion only liberates and makes absolute -- unnaturally absolute, perhaps -- what's there already. That is very much how love potions were seen in the middle ages.But meyer's remark made me think of a relative's husband (soon ex-) who had a bright mind but a severe drink problem. A psychologist said that it wasn't the drink itself that had made him unpleasant and even violent, it just gave him the excuse to behave the way he really wanted to. Wagner's lovers are actually doing something similar, by overriding all other considerations, society, practicality, morality, the law, other people's feelings, the whole world really -- all in the name of one overwhelming, absolute inner desire. The world can't normally tolerate such things; darkness, night and death are their only refuge.Cheers,Mike

Mike - isn't the passion between the two lovers very similar 0 it can't survive without its forbidden, suppressed aspects. But while it can't be satisfied it is nonetheless irresistible as with your friend it is therefore by definition destructive - an irresistible drive that can never achieve it goal can only result in death which means that death is its true goal - the ending with Isolde which bothers so many people (is she alive or dead or what) is perfectly in line with the drama - she has given herself over to the world of Night and no longer exists in the Day world.

Post by GaryAre Tristan & Isolde in love with each other before they drink the lovepotion or are they in love only because they drank the love potion?TIA for your opinions.- Gary

I see it that they are in love with each other before they drink the potion but are hiding it for different reasons. The potion gives them the reason to express their love and it doesn't really matter to them if its a love potion, death potion or Coca Cola - it gives them the "out" to express their true feelings for each other.

Post by GaryAre Tristan & Isolde in love with each other before they drink the lovepotion or are they in love only because they drank the love potion?TIA for your opinions.- Gary

I've always thought Wagner was deliberately ambiguous on that question. Hewrote this in an age when potions were commonly used in operatic works; heused them elsewhere himself. So I imagine Wagner saying to his public, "Youwant potions? Here they are!"

On the other hand, as your question implies, the plot works just as well ifwe imagine the so-called potion is entirely ineffective. If they boththought they had drunk poison, that would liberate them to declare theirlove, since being about to die they would have nothing to lose.

Post by GaryAre Tristan & Isolde in love with each other before they drink the lovepotion or are they in love only because they drank the love potion?TIA for your opinions.- Gary

It's left open to interpretation, but most people believe that Tristan and Isolde had feelings for each other before imbibing the potion. "In love" might be a bit of a stretch, however. Both characters have reasons to be deeply conflicted. Tristan is loyal to his uncle, for example, while Isolde resents Tristan's role in her husband's death. But the two characters are definitely attracted to each other. Just listen to Isolde's music (as another poster suggests), which makes Isolde's feelings, at least, clear enough.

You could say that the potion reveals what the characters have tried to keep hidden. But even more than that, it overcomes their natural reservations and inhibitions. Once Tristan and Isolde drink the potion, the barriers keeping them apart seem to crumble and lose all importance.

Post by GaryAre Tristan & Isolde in love with each other before they drink the lovepotion or are they in love only because they drank the love potion?TIA for your opinions.- Gary

It's left open to interpretation, but most people believe that Tristan and Isolde had feelings for each other before imbibing the potion. "In love" might be a bit of a stretch, however. Both characters have reasons to be deeply conflicted. Tristan is loyal to his uncle, for example, while Isolde resents Tristan's role in her husband's death. But the two characters are definitely attracted to each other. Just listen to Isolde's music (as another poster suggests), which makes Isolde's feelings, at least, clear enough.You could say that the potion reveals what the characters have tried to keep hidden. But even more than that, it overcomes their natural reservations and inhibitions. Once Tristan and Isolde drink the potion, the barriers keeping them apart seem to crumble and lose all importance.REP

Note Morolt was not Isoldes husband 0 he was her betrothed as they used to say.

Post by GaryAre Tristan & Isolde in love with each other before they drink the lovepotion or are they in love only because they drank the love potion?TIA for your opinions.- Gary

It's left open to interpretation, but most people believe that Tristan and Isolde had feelings for each other before imbibing the potion. "In love" might be a bit of a stretch, however. Both characters have reasons to be deeply conflicted. Tristan is loyal to his uncle, for example, while Isolde resents Tristan's role in her husband's death. But the two characters are definitely attracted to each other. Just listen to Isolde's music (as another poster suggests), which makes Isolde's feelings, at least, clear enough.You could say that the potion reveals what the characters have tried to keep hidden. But even more than that, it overcomes their natural reservations and inhibitions. Once Tristan and Isolde drink the potion, the barriers keeping them apart seem to crumble and lose all importance.REP

Note Morolt was not Isoldes husband 0 he was her betrothed as they used to say.

That will teach me to dash off a hasty reply. Yes, there are definiteindications of an attraction which pre-dates the potion. Didn't Wielandonce stage the scene where they fell into a wild embrace the very momentthat they'd drunk it, in the belief that since they were about to die,nothing mattered any more and they could admit their feelings both openlyand to each other? That was making a pretty clear statement of thesituation.

Post by Bert CoulesThat will teach me to dash off a hasty reply. Yes, there are definiteindications of an attraction which pre-dates the potion. Didn't Wielandonce stage the scene where they fell into a wild embrace the very momentthat they'd drunk it, in the belief that since they were about to die,nothing mattered any more and they could admit their feelings both openlyand to each other? That was making a pretty clear statement of thesituation.

Yes that's true and Wagners very specific stage directions - though they may read a little old fashioned - are pretty clear as well. This opera can cast, under the right circumstances, a kind of spell over the listener as well unlike any other opera.